Seeking vindication: Babar Awan offers another apology to SC

Openly criticises PPP’s policy on the appointment of ad-hoc judges.


Our Correspondent May 08, 2012

ISLAMABAD:


After being completely sidelined by the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) leadership for not appearing before the Supreme Court (SC) to testify in the contempt of court hearing against Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani, former law minister Babar Awan offered yet another unconditional apology before the SC on Monday, seeking restoration of his suspended license.


Before submitting his apology to the SC on Monday, Awan openly criticised PPP’s policy for the first time.

“The appointment of ad hoc and additional judges in the courts is permitted by the Constitution and if one has an objection to that, then amendments to the Constitution be made first,” said Awan.

In his apology, Awan asserted that the “SC had barred the prospects of a livelihood of a person, which is impinging upon the fundamental human rights of an individual.”

“I am regretful over the comments I made during a news conference and unconditionally apologise again for my remarks which resulted in the cancellation of my license,” he said.

“Whatever I said was completely unintentional, inadvertent and I offer an unconditional apology, for utterances that have been found prima facie to be disrespectful by the court,” he added.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 8th, 2012. 

COMMENTS (3)

Beatle | 11 years ago | Reply

Your commemnts were neither unintentional, nor inadvertent at all, and you tried to buffoon the SC Judges. Any doubts - replay the TV footage.

Meet | 11 years ago | Reply

@syed Imran: He and cronies of ppp will have Justice coming to them soon IA none of These politicians deserves to rule Pakistan now they are introducing thier next generation to the country they all should be hanged in public n country should elect new people

VIEW MORE COMMENTS
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ